Literature DB >> 17540817

Heterogeneity in anatomic outcome of sacrospinous ligament fixation for prolapse: a systematic review.

Daniel M Morgan1, Mary A M Rogers, Markus Huebner, John T Wei, John O Delancey.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To explore why failure rates vary so much between published reports of sacrospinous ligament fixation to correct pelvic organ prolapse and what the potential sources of heterogeneity may be. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE was queried for studies between 1966 and 2005 that included the term "sacrospinous." METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: One-hundred eighty-seven studies were reviewed. Studies were selected if they 1) involved a surgical procedure performed unilaterally with a posterior or apical vaginal incision and approach to the ligament; 2) reported objective outcomes with a classification system (Baden-Walker, pelvic organ prolapse quantification) over a defined follow-up period; and 3) were published in English, French, or German. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted for both objective and subjective measures of failure. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND
RESULTS: Seventeen cohorts met the selection criteria, and the Baden-Walker vaginal profile or a close variation suitable for meta-analysis was used in 10 of them. Variability in failure rates was observed depending on site of and grade of vaginal support (P<.05). The anterior compartment was the most common site of failure for any given grade. This was most striking when the criterion for failure was grade 1 (40.1% anterior, 11.0% apical, 18.2% posterior) or grade 2 prolapse (21.3% anterior, 7.2% apical, 6.3% posterior). Areas of vaginal support were more equally affected when the criterion for failure was grade 3 prolapse (3.7% anterior, 2.7% apical, 2.3% posterior). Among cohorts using grade 2 prolapse as the criterion for objective failure, the pooled measure of failure to relieve symptoms was 10.3% (95% confidence interval 4.4-16.2%) and to provide patient satisfaction was 13.0% (95% confidence interval 7.4-18.6%).
CONCLUSION: The variation in published failure rates after sacrospinous ligament fixation is, in part, accounted for by differences in how anatomical outcomes are evaluated and which compartment of vaginal support is being considered. Failure rates are highest in the anterior compartment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17540817     DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000264066.89094.21

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  32 in total

Review 1.  Management of apical pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Alexandriah N Alas; Jennifer T Anger
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  Apical sling: an approach to posthysterectomy vault prolapse.

Authors:  Alexandriah N Alas; Ines Pereira; Neeraja Chandrasekaran; Hemikaa Devakumar; Luis Espaillat; Eric Hurtado; G Willy Davila
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-04-06       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Vaginal hysterectomy with bilateral sacrospinous fixation plus an anterior mesh versus abdominal sacrocervicopexy for the treatment of primary apical prolapse in postmenopausal women: a randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Edilson Benedito de Castro; Luiz Gustavo O Brito; Cassia Raquel T Juliato
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-04-26       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  FPMRS challenges on behalf of the Collaborative Research in Pelvic Surgery Consortium (CoRPS): managing complicated cases : Series 3: Challenging recurrent prolapse in a medically complicated patient.

Authors:  Danielle D Antosh; Ladin A Yurteri-Kaplan; David Shveiky; Madalena Liu; Chris Heisler; Aparna Hegde; Cara L Grimes
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  Comparison of 2 transvaginal surgical approaches and perioperative behavioral therapy for apical vaginal prolapse: the OPTIMAL randomized trial.

Authors:  Matthew D Barber; Linda Brubaker; Kathryn L Burgio; Holly E Richter; Ingrid Nygaard; Alison C Weidner; Shawn A Menefee; Emily S Lukacz; Peggy Norton; Joseph Schaffer; John N Nguyen; Diane Borello-France; Patricia S Goode; Sharon Jakus-Waldman; Cathie Spino; Lauren Klein Warren; Marie G Gantz; Susan F Meikle
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2014-03-12       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Concomitant Anterior Repair, Preoperative Prolapse Severity, and Anatomic Prolapse Outcomes After Vaginal Apical Procedures.

Authors:  Charles W Nager; Cara L Grimes; Tracy L Nolen; Clifford Y Wai; Linda Brubaker; Peter C Jeppson; Tracey S Wilson; Anthony G Visco; Matthew D Barber; Gary Sutkin; Peggy Norton; Charles R Rardin; Lily Arya; Dennis Wallace; Susan F Meikle
Journal:  Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg       Date:  2019 Jan/Feb       Impact factor: 2.091

7.  Surgical outcomes of anterior trans-obturator mesh and vaginal sacrospinous ligament fixation for severe pelvic organ prolapse in overweight and obese Asian women.

Authors:  Tsia-Shu Lo; Yiap Loong Tan; Siwatchaya Khanuengkitkong; Anil Krishna Dass
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-10-24       Impact factor: 2.894

8.  Anatomical and functional outcomes of posterior intravaginal slingplasty for the treatment of vaginal vault or uterine prolapse: a prospective, multicenter study.

Authors:  Young-Suk Lee; Deok Hyun Han; Ji Youl Lee; Joon Chul Kim; Myung-Soo Choo; Kyu-Sung Lee
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2010-03-19

Review 9.  Native tissue repair for central compartment prolapse: a narrative review.

Authors:  Dorit Paz-Levy; David Yohay; Joerg Neymeyer; Ranit Hizkiyahu; Adi Y Weintraub
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-05-21       Impact factor: 2.894

10.  Trocar-guided total tension-free vaginal mesh repair of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse.

Authors:  Alfredo L Milani; Mariella I J Withagen; Mark E Vierhout
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2009-06-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.